Probability of exclusion in paternity testing: time to reassess

The average exclusion probability is a measure of efficiency in paternity testing; it refers to the a priori ability of a battery of tests to detect paternity inconsistencies. This parameter measures the capacity of the system to detect a false accusation of paternity. Traditionally, this average exclusion probability has been estimated as the probability of excluding a man who is not the father by an inconsistency in at least one of the studied loci. We suggest that this criterion should be corrected, as currently the presumed father is excluded when at least three genetic inconsistencies are found with the child being tested, not just one. This change of criterion has occurred because of the use of microsatellite loci, whose mutation rates are much greater than those of the coding genes used previously in paternity studies. We propose the use of the average probability of exclusion for at least three loci (not only one), as an honest measure of the combined probability of exclusion of several loci, and we propose an algebraic expression to calculate it.     

Deterrence and arrest ratios

In the limited research on the origins of sanction threat perceptions, researchers have focused on either the effects of actively engaging in crime or the effects of formal sanctioning but rarely on both (i.e., the arrest ratio or the number of arrests relative to the number of crimes committed). This article extends this line of research by using a sample of Colorado inmates and measures arrest ratios and sanction perceptions for eight different crime types. Analyses reveal that the offenders report both significant experiential and arrest ratio effects. Theoretical and policy implications, limitations, and directions for future research are outlined.     

Incremental Thinking: "The Lack of a Budgetary Theory"

Editor's Note: More than 40 years ago. V.O. Key identified the basic budgeting question as: ”On what basis shall it be decided to allocate x dollars to activity A instead of activity B?“ Despite decades of budgetary research and innovation, the question remains unanswered and probably unanswerable. As Key recognized, a solution to this problem would constitute a full-blown theory of government. Although neither Key nor others have provided a firm answer to this basic question. Key's article is a valuable reminder that budgeting is much more than technique. This lesson is immediately forgotten when the latest reform comes to market promising a neat formula for dividing the budget pie. The lesson is relearned again when administrative and political pathologists seek cause and effect for the failure of the most recent promising innovation.